Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 82

Thread: PatEF; the "Ef" for efficiency

  1. #61
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    153
    Hello Pvster.

    Any comments on this PatBam?







    Here is another PatBam version (the PatBam PPE):








    In theabove two animations the PatBam is applied on a Pulling Piston Engine (PPE, for more click http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPPE.htm);


    the lubrication in the crankcase is 4-stroke;


    the design is cross-head;


    the piston is not touching the bore (only the piston rings touch the bore and need lubrication; the piston itself does not need any lubrication);


    the dead volume of the "scavenging pump" can be variable and can be as small as desirable;


    the reed valve (without its petals) is shown inside the bellmouth (at top).



    The "piston rod" aligns precisely the auxiliary chamber (formed inside the piston) with the auxiliary piston (secured to the casing).


    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    Last edited by manolis8; 12-02-2017 at 11:31 AM.

  2. #62
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,167
    I've looked at your whole website, nearly everything on it is a variation on prior technology, and nearly everything is workable as a computer model.
    I see nothing that is workable in practice that would produce any practical benefits over current mature technology.
    Why not spend your money on developing one of your designs instead of developing extra patents? If you have confidence that your designs are better than what's current prove it...........otherwise it's just pretty pictures.
    Shit or get off the pot.
    seesecurity.com.au

  3. #63
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    1,409
    Quote Originally Posted by yzr750 View Post
    Shit or get off the pot.
    My sentiments as well.

  4. #64
    apriliaforum expert photoRotor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    SE corner of the NW
    Posts
    9,805
    Quote Originally Posted by yzr750 View Post
    Shit or get off the forum

    Fixed it for us.
    JD

    '01 Futura

  5. #65
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    153
    Hello Yzr750.

    It would be more honest if you were signing your posts by your real name.

    It would also be gentler if you supported you arguments with evidences without insulting comments; after all, it is nothing more than a technical discussion.


    From your posts it is obvious you do not yet understand (32 years after filing an international patent, as you claim unanimously, and after spending 80,000 something for the patent lawyers) what the criteria for granting a patent are, so let me explain to you.

    Who knows, someone who, silently, reads this discussion may learn something useful.


    Besides the formalities, in order a patent to be granted by the patent office examiners, there are three basic criteria:

    1. The idea / invention has to be new.

    2. The idea /invention has to have an inventive step non obvious to the skilled in the art.

    3. The idea / invention has to be industrially applicable.


    Most patents are improvements of previous patents.
    Only rarely an invention introduces a new class of patents.


    Let me give you an example of improvement.


    You compatriot Thompson Alexander filed (worldwide) an invention for a constant velocity joint.
    Among the patents granted to him is the U.S.7,442,126.
    He called the mechanism TCVJ and presented it as the “apocalypse”.



    He created a company (unless I am wrong with investors’ money), he manufactured a number of prototypes and he tested them extensively.
    Then he presented his invention in the web and he started selling TCVJ joints.

    Then he discovered the problem (the catastrophe):


    Quote from the Wikipedia:

    “The Thompson constant velocity joint (TCVJ), also known as a Thompson coupling, assembles two cardan joints within each other to eliminate the intermediate shaft. A control yoke is added to keep the input and output shafts aligned. The control yoke uses a spherical pantograph scissor mechanism to bisect the angle between the input and output shafts and to maintain the joints at a relative phase angle of zero. The alignment ensures constant angular velocity at all joint angles. Eliminating the intermediate shaft and keeping the input shafts aligned in the homokinetic plane greatly reduces the induced shear stresses and vibration inherent in double cardan shafts. While the geometric configuration does not maintain constant velocity for the control yoke that aligns the cardan joints, the control yoke has minimal inertia and generates little vibration.

    Continuous use of a standard Thompson coupling at a straight-through, zero-degree angle will cause excessive wear and damage to the joint; a minimum offset of 2 degrees between the input and output shafts is needed to reduce control yoke wear.

    Modifying the input and output yokes so that they are not precisely normal to their respective shafts can alter or eliminate the "disallowed" angles***

    (*** pattakon.com. "PatDan and PatCVJ Constant Velocity Joints". Retrieved 2012-07-26.)

    End of Quote.



    Here is the patented PatCVJ (mentioned by the Wikipedia):







    If you read carefully the explanations (simple geometry and physics) at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatDan.htm I bet you will appreciate the pattakon solution.

    In simple words, the PatCVJ cures the most crucial problem of the TCVJ by a small change on the geometry of the mechanism.
    Why “crucial”?
    Imagine a Constant Velocity Joint that, according its manufacturer’s specifications, is not allowed to operate with the two shafts collinear! . . .that crucial . . !)

    So, yes, the pattakon PatCVJ is an improvement over the Thompson TCVJ (with the Thompson TCVJ, in turn, being an improvement over numerous similar double Cardan CVJ’s inventions filed some years, or some centuries, earlier).


    Does this makes the PatCVJ “a patent troll”?

    If yes, what makes the TCVJ “not a patent troll”?

    It is up to you to decide; but you can’t play with common reasoning.


    Even with this improvement, the TCVJ / PatCVJ have a significant limitation for several applications: the small maximum angle between the two cooperating shafts.



    Then pattakon invented the PatDAN (not an improvement; a completely different story):





    (the last animation is a stereoscopic one; for instructions on how to see it: http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonStereoscopy.htm )

    and some patents have been granted to pattakon for the PatDAN.

    The angles between the two cooperating shafts are by far larger, (say from -60 to 60 degrees) without “weak / wearing” angles between the two angle limits.

    And its torque capacity is substantially higher because it avoids the vulnerable / weak “pantograph mechanism” of the TCVJ / PatCVJ.


    But it needs a higher geometry / physics background, plenty of time and good will to get how it works and how it solves a long existing problem.

    Alternatively, you can call it “patent trolling” without understanding a bit of what you are talking about.


    So, why didn’t we put it in production?

    Because it requires a manufacturing and a commercialization infrastructure we (pattakon) have not.
    But we have the patents.
    If a company wants to commercialize the PatDAN, they have all the required “contact information” to communicate.

    It is wrong to think that when something is not in production, it is not necessarily problematic.


    By the way, before publishing the PatCVJ and the PatDAN in the Internet, we tried (unsuccessfully) to contact Thompson Coupling / Australia. They had a more than serious problem, their customers were returning the TCVJ to the factory, someone was proposing a solution, and they decided not to reply.


    The previous (CVJ joints) is one only example on how the patenting system works.



    Recently the PatBam idea (controllable HCCI combustion) was published in this forum.

    It is a similar case.
    Several inventions deal with the same problem.
    All creating significant side-effects worse than the original problem.

    If you could “read” this plot:



    (more at http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPatBam.htm )

    you would avoid the easy way of rejecting something (as “patent trolling”) because it takes time to understand it.

    But it is your choice and your right.


    By the way, has, anybody of you, who talks about “patent trolling”, a real patent to show?
    With patent number, with a name and an address on it?
    To compare with any of the pattakon patent?
    Anybody?
    Please?

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  6. #66
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,167
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Blah blah blah
    pretty pictures
    blah blah blah
    pretty pictures
    blah blah blah
    Ad infinitum
    seesecurity.com.au

  7. #67
    apriliaforum expert yzr750's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Brisbane Australia
    Posts
    4,167
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello Yzr750.
    By the way, has, anybody of you, who talks about “patent trolling”, a real patent to show?
    With patent number, with a name and an address on it?
    To compare with any of the pattakon patent?
    Anybody?
    Please?

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    What does it matter? Something does not have to work for you to get a patent on it, you can have as many stupid patents as you like and the only thing you have is the satisfaction of telling people you have a patent.
    Why are you here? What is the point of coming on to forums such as this? Are you expecting people to be fawning over your genius? Expecting to pick up an investor or two? What is the point?
    I worked for the CSIRO (Commonwealth scientific and industrial research organisation) here in Australia for 10 years, my job was to produce working prototypes from the ideas of the scientists, I'm well versed in the difference between idea and reality, maybe you should introduce yourself to that concept.....
    seesecurity.com.au

  8. #68
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    VANCOUVER
    Posts
    130
    Quote Originally Posted by manolis8 View Post
    Hello Pvster.

    Any comments on this PatBam? The piston may not need lubrication, but the piston "rod" and stabilizing track sure would. And how do the rings go from seated against the bore, to unseated as the piston approaches TDC, and back again without huge stress/vibration? Pretty cool though. Has anybody built one, or similar?







    Here is another PatBam version (the PatBam PPE):








    In theabove two animations the PatBam is applied on a Pulling Piston Engine (PPE, for more click http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonPPE.htm);


    the lubrication in the crankcase is 4-stroke;


    the design is cross-head;


    the piston is not touching the bore (only the piston rings touch the bore and need lubrication; the piston itself does not need any lubrication);


    the dead volume of the "scavenging pump" can be variable and can be as small as desirable;


    the reed valve (without its petals) is shown inside the bellmouth (at top).



    The "piston rod" aligns precisely the auxiliary chamber (formed inside the piston) with the auxiliary piston (secured to the casing).


    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos
    The piston may not need lubrication, but the piston "rod" and stabilizing track sure would. And how do the rings go from seated against the bore, to unseated as the piston approaches TDC, and back again without huge stress/vibration? Pretty cool though. Has anybody built one, or similar?

  9. #69
    apriliaforum expert Hellgate's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    AUSTX
    Posts
    7,510
    Quote Originally Posted by photoRotor View Post
    Fixed it for us.
    Agreed...



    Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk
    Pete

  10. #70
    apriliaforum expert millietant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Used to be sunny Durham, now dull and rainy Midlands, England
    Posts
    1,729
    Manolis8 - a word of advice - STOP !!............ please.

    If you were a stage performer, I'd say you have "lost" your audience - except that I don't think you actually ever had an audience of more than 5 or 6 here and of those still bothering, there's nothing constructive coming out (mainly because you derogate any comments or questions anyone has).

    Can't you see that you've beaten the positivity out of anyone who had a genuine interest in what you have to say. You're wasting your own time, as well as that of most (but not all, I grant you) forum readers/members here.

    It may well just be a language thing in the way you express your views, but your tone comes across to me (and from what I can see on here to others as well) as condescending and insulting - even it's not meant to - and if it isn't, that's unfortunate and I suggest you become more proficient in "expressing yourself" (not just typing words) in English, before posting in that language.

    You may well have some fantastic and ingenious ideas and lots of technical knowledge and other expertise/skill sets, but it looks like "communications" is not one of them.

    Goodbye.
    Cheers,

    "I am a selfish, self-righteous tosser", a "fucking loser" and now an "absolute fucking idiot"

    Me - '03 RSV Mille, '89 FJ 1200 x 2, & '75 TL 125 & Schweizer S300 CBi Helicopter
    Wife - '01 FZ1 (Fazer 1000), '86 VF 750 Interceptor and '07 CRF 230F
    Kids - '03 Fazer 600, GY 125 and CRF 100 off roaders, '10 Reiju RS2 50 Matrix Pro

  11. #71
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    1,409
    Quote Originally Posted by YVRFACTORY View Post
    The piston may not need lubrication, but the piston "rod" and stabilizing track sure would. And how do the rings go from seated against the bore, to unseated as the piston approaches TDC, and back again without huge stress/vibration? Pretty cool though. Has anybody built one, or similar?
    That's his M.O. he posts computer models and collects ideas/feedback, then posts final renditions stating they are "working" ideas and files patents. He has yet to build an actual working prototype. He doesn't understand the difference between a concept and actual working prototype. Thus he makes untested claims.

    Don't feed the patent troll.

  12. #72
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    153
    Hello Millietant.

    Thanks for your post / advice.


    On the other hand,
    in a strictly technical discussion the only that really matters is the technical arguments, especially the negative ones.

    As for the correct use of the English language,
    the images / animations / videos (i.e. the international language which is similarly understood by the Chinese, by the Japanese, by the Americans, by the Africans, by the Russians, by the Europeans etc) resolve the communication problem, say as in the following post.


    In a strictly technical discussion the point is not to make the audience friendly.

    It is the opposite.

    The more “hostile” the audience becomes (say, as here), the more negative the technical arguments (if any) turn, because the posters are looking how to “kill” the claims of the “annoying / bothering / tiresome guy who thinks he knows something”

    So, what I want is not positive comments.
    What I am looking for is negative technical arguments / unfavorable technical critics.

    The non technical arguments, positive or negative, are of no value.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  13. #73
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    153
    Hello Vvrfactory.

    You write:
    “The piston may not need lubrication, but the piston "rod" and stabilizing track sure would.”


    The piston “rod” and the stabilizing track are / move into the crankcase and are lubricated by the crankcase lubricant (say, as the piston skirt and the cylinder liner of the conventional 4-stroke engines are lubricated by the oil of the crankshaft).

    By the way, the piston pin sliders (or slippers), as they move along the slideways on the casing, take the thrust loads at low friction, ridding the piston “rod” and the stabilizing track (the hole in the center of the “anvil”) unloaded.

    Why “anvil”.
    Because it is like the piston hits the compressed homogenous mixture trapped into the auxiliary chamber onto the anvil like a hammer or a trigger of a gun.



    You also write:
    “And how do the rings go from seated against the bore, to unseated as the piston approaches TDC, and back again without huge stress/vibration?”


    Exactly as in the conventional ported 2-stroke engines.

    Here is a 2-stroke (unconventional) PPE engine having transfer ports at the ends of its cylinders:



    The above PPE engine has poppet valves for the exhaust.

    Tha PatBam PPE of the last post has not poppet valves. Instead, at the “BDC” end of the cylinder there are exhaust and transfer ports. The bridges between the ports is whereon the piston rings abut / slide during the exhaust and the transfer.

    Is this what you meant?


    On the other hand, the PatBam can be applied to 4-strokes PPE engines, as well, say as this one:



    All it takes it an “anvil” and the modification of the piston.



    You also write:
    “Pretty cool though. Has anybody built one, or similar?”


    No.

    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

  14. #74
    apriliaforum expert
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Clearwater, Fl
    Posts
    7,207
    So you are still looking for free collaboration. How much profit do you make from doing this? What are your plans for compensating those who give you coaching and assist in your designs? Most would just hire or partner with another engineer for a flat fee or on a percentage of the profits basis to review and test their computer models prior to building the first physical model.

  15. #75
    apriliaforum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    Athens Greece
    Posts
    153
    Hello Pvster

    You write:
    “That's his M.O. he posts computer models and collects ideas/feedback, then posts final renditions stating they are "working" ideas and files patents. He has yet to build an actual working prototype.”


    You are wrong.

    The patenting system works differently than what you think.

    Something already published (in the web, in a magazine, anywhere) cannot be patented because it cannot be considered as new any longer.

    Even if the idea or the invention belongs to the guy who publishes it, he cannot take a patent for it.

    I.e. any idea or improvement you may propose (I didn’t see any, so far) is not patentable, neither by you, nor by me.

    So, when you have a good idea /invention in mind, first apply for a patent and only then talk about it, or publish it.

    So, reconsider your accusation.



    You also write:

    “He doesn't understand the difference between a concept and actual working prototype. Thus he makes untested claims.
    Don't feed the patent troll.”


    Please, do search, once more, the pattakon web site.

    And if you fail finding “actual working prototypes”, please do let me know.

    I will be glad to present in this discussion several “actual working prototypes” of pattakon.


    For instance, the following Variable Valve Actuation cars:





    At http://www.pattakon.com/DVA_files/pattakonVVAs.pps you can find the presentation, at Engine Expo 2008 Stuttgart Germany, of the above prototype and some technical details / specifications.

    For more: http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonRod.htm and http://www.pattakon.com/pattakonRoller.htm


    Thanks
    Manolis Pattakos

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst ... 3456 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Stick with the RS or go for a restricted 400!??
    By technoandy in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-23-2003, 09:12 AM
  2. Giving up on the RS, traded it for a CBR250RR
    By Tokyo Rider in forum RS125 Euro-archive
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-21-2003, 02:29 AM
  3. The coolest Sprockets in the World...and now for Aprilia
    By micah apriliaforum com in forum SL1000 Falco Forum (all years)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-29-2002, 08:14 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •